« first day (4 days earlier)      last day (16 days later) » 

Hold To The Rod
Hold To The Rod
5:27 AM
@NotThatGuy you've offered a strawman of how people develop trust.
@SpiritRealmInvestigator what Mario shares here is certainly consistent with what the God I have come to know is capable of doing; whether this specific story is accurate I do not know.
 
Hold To The Rod
Hold To The Rod
5:45 AM
@NotThatGuy consider that you might not appreciate it too much if someone compared a significant trusting relationship you have to a chat on a dating website. Also, I see no value in believing in a God who just tells me what I want to hear. That seems like an entirely pointless theology.
Maybe we can clear the air on our past discussion at some point, but for now I'm going to have to stick with my comments from earlier. Take care.
 
 
7 hours later…
NotThatGuy
NotThatGuy
12:42 PM
@HoldToTheRod It's not a strawman, those are analogies, to demonstrate how being able to distinguish a source, the truth of what a source says and the truth of who that source is are distinct. This can apply to any argument or claim which seems to rely on one following from the others.

"you might not appreciate it too much if someone compared a significant trusting relationship you have to a chat on a dating website" - Firstly, now you're the one saying things others would be offended by: you're underestimating how much some people trust and value those they've spoken to extensively and in…
 
 
2 hours later…
NotThatGuy
NotThatGuy
2:27 PM
And if you say God has demonstrated to you that he is actually God, I'm happy to grant that you believe that. But, and while I don't know what exactly you experienced, based on accounts of other spiritual experiences, I'll probably maintain that whatever evidence you have doesn't sufficiently demonstrate that what you experienced is actually God.
And that is not a strawman either. You say "X sufficiently demonstrates that God is actually God" and I say "X does not sufficiently demonstrate that God is actually God". I'm not misrepresenting your position, I'm disagreeing with your claims and arguments.
 
Spirit Realm Investigator
Spirit Realm Investigator
2:53 PM
@NotThatGuy: based on accounts of other spiritual experiences, I'll probably maintain that whatever evidence you have doesn't sufficiently demonstrate that what you experienced is actually God - Can you please share examples of these other accounts?
 
 
3 hours later…
NotThatGuy
NotThatGuy
5:54 PM
@SpiritRealmInvestigator Like most/all of the experiences you pointed me towards.
 
 
2 hours later…
Spirit Realm Investigator
Spirit Realm Investigator
7:27 PM
@NotThatGuy - What counts as "sufficient evidence" that an experience comes from God?
Btw, did you watch this testimony (5 min): youtu.be/k-4vEXH5bcA?t=4443 ?
 
 
2 hours later…
NotThatGuy
NotThatGuy
9:02 PM
@SpiritRealmInvestigator I'm sure we've discussed sufficient evidence a few times before, both in general, and as it relates to spiritual experiences (demonstrating that a Christian's interpretation of an experience as supernatural is true, which we've discussed, is roughly equivalent to demonstrating that it came from God). What I wrote above also addresses that: at a minimum, there shouldn't be plausible natural explanations. But that was kind of my question to HoldToTheRod: what is his certainty based on.
 
Spirit Realm Investigator
Spirit Realm Investigator
9:31 PM
@NotThatGuy - How can we determine that there shouldn't be plausible natural explanations for an event X? How can we determine what is plausible and what isn't on naturalism?
@NotThatGuy - If plausibility of the existence of an alternative explanation removes the warrant of a belief, is the belief in the existence of a physical world around us unwarranted because it is plausible that everything could very well just be an illusion?
 

« first day (4 days earlier)      last day (16 days later) »